Allowed

Prakash Bhupal Bindage v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC29 Mar 2017ABA/359/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application filed by Prakash Bhupal Bindage in a case involving alleged rape and cruelty. The court, noting the applicant's cooperation and the bail status of other co-accused, granted pre-arrest bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Granted pre-arrest bail conditioned upon furnishing a Police Record Bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties, attending the police station every Sunday, and refraining from contacting the complainant or witne

Prakash Bhupal Bindage Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

aba.359.17.6.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 359 OF 2017

¶3

Prakash Bhupal Bindage ...Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra ...Respondent

¶4

Mr. Manoj Patil for the Applicant

¶5

Mr. S. S. Hulke, A.P.P for the Respondent-State

¶6

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE, J. WEDNESDAY, 29th MARCH, 2017

¶7

P.C.

¶8

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned A.P.P

¶9

for the State.

¶10

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in

¶11

connection with C.R. No. 18 of 2017 registered with the Shirol Police Station, Kolhapur, for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 376(f), 498A r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant

¶13

has been falsely named in the FIR and that false allegations have been

1/4

SQ Pathan

aba.359.17.6.doc

made against him. He further submits that no such incident as alleged had taken place.

¶18

Learned A.P.P has tendered the 164 statement of the

¶19

complainant/prosecutrix. The same is taken on record.

¶20

Perused the papers including the 164 statement. The applicant is the brother-in-law of the complainant. The complainant is a married woman having two children. It appears that because of the dispute between the complainant with her husband and in-laws, she started residing in the same house, separately with her husband and children. According to the complainant, the applicant was asking the complainant to give her son in adoption to him, as he had no son. She has stated that she had refused to give her son in adoption to the applicant. She has further stated in her complaint that the applicant entered her room and committed forcible intercourse. The said complaint regarding the incident was lodged one month after the said incident. In her 164 statement dated 24^th March, 2017, the complainant has stated that she has no complaint against any person and that she had lodged the complaint in a fit of anger. It is not in dispute

2/4

SQ Pathan

aba.359.17.6.doc

that all the other co-accused i.e. husband and in-laws have been enlarged on

¶25

bail by the trial Court. It is also not in dispute that the applicant had attended the concerned Police Station pursuant to the interim order dated 8^th March, 2017 and has cooperated with the investigation.

¶26

In the facts and circumstances, the application is allowed and

¶27

the applicant is granted pre-arrest bail on the following terms and conditions :

¶28

ORDER

¶29

(i) In the event of the arrest, the applicant be enlarged on bail on furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount;

¶30

(ii) The applicant shall attend the concerned Police Station on every Sunday between 11:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m, till the filing of the charge-sheet;

¶31

(iii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not attempt to influence, pressurize or contact the complainant, witnesses or any person concerned with the case.

3/4

SQ Pathan

aba.359.17.6.doc

The Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed of.

¶36

It is made clear that the observations made herein are prima facie and are confined to this application and the learned Judge to decide the case on its own merits, uninfluenced by the observations made herein.

¶37

All concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶38

REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.

¶39

4/4

¶40

SQ Pathan

Prakash Bhupal Bindage v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Bhupal Bindage v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prabhakar Dattaram Shelar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shankar Mahadev Sawant Vs the State of Maharashtra

Shamrao Shravan Chbukswar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sopan Alias Pappu Maruti Gavali Vs the State of Maharashtra

Tarun Sunil Roy Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mukhtar @ Raj Zakir Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra